CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #56 *ARREST*

[katydid23]

Yes, there is plenty of evidence that points to PF as the murderer.
But I think the prosecution is also depending on their star witness and her testimony, especially since they do not have a body.
I can imagine the defense is going to question her aggressively, and challenge her every word.

I'm still wondering what happens if they find that she is lying about something significant, (even though it may be impossible) and enough if the jury does not believe her, what happens next?

Of course I'm hoping the jury will believe her and consider all the evidence carefully, but in the event that they can't reach a decision or KK doesn't meet the terms of the plea deal, then what happens?

Oh I agree, they are going to go after her very aggressively and try to disprove as much as possible.

But I don't think they are going to do that by having PF admit to his own guilt. JMO

 

[MassGuy]

Oh I agree, they are going to go after her very aggressively and try to disprove as much as possible.

But I don't think they are going to do that by having PF admit to his own guilt. JMO

Yeah, the defense is trying to beat this whole thing, not turn PF into a Kamikaze pilot.

 

[Seattle1]

"Ms. Kenney has never stepped foot into the Teller County courthouse. She has no prior experience with the criminal justice system. Allowing the media’s request to have cameras in the courtroom pointed directly at Ms. Kenney creates an unnecessary risk of compromising her ability to focus on this important proceeding. Additionally, expanded media unduly detracts from the solemnity, decorum and dignity of the court. "

And more in the document:

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/04th_Judicial_District/Teller/caseofinterest/2019CR17/2019-02-06 10-19-23 2019 02-06 - LEE - Pleadings - Objection to Expanded Media Coverage.pdf

In one of the paragraphs they even reference Frazee and his hearing.

Even though the doc is from months ago, I smh at her rights and her interest in solemnity decorum and dignity...

Jmo.

^^bbm

Just to be clear, the reasons KK's lawyer provided in support of opposition to grant Expanded Media Coverage (EMC) at KK's hearing (copied in your post), should not be read to suggest that KK has or thinks she has more or special rights, or exaggerated interest in court decorum. Their argument was actually directed specifically to the factors provided in Rule 2. (See I, II, III below).

Cameras in State courtrooms are provided for under the rules governing each respective state. There's no blanket rule for this-- except in federal courtrooms.

Specific to Colorado, it's Colorado Supreme Court Rules, Chapter 38, Rule 2 entitled "Media Coverage of Court Proceeding" that governs.

Rule 2 referenced above essentially says "No" to cameras in courtrooms during criminal trials, with two exceptions.

Rule 2 states that advisement and arraignment hearings may be considered by the Court for expanded media coverage.

It's also not an automatic that all advisement and arraignment hearings will allow cameras, only that the Court will consider granting permission for these two types of hearings.

Rule 2 outlines three factors for the Judge to consider when making a ruling whether or not to permit EMC, which include the following:

(I) Whether there is a reasonable likelihood that expanded media coverage would interfere with the rights of the parties to a fair trial;

(II) Whether there is a reasonable likelihood that expanded media coverage would unduly detract from solemnity, decorum and dignity of the court; and

(III) Whether expanded media coverage would create adverse effects that would be greater than those caused by traditional media coverage.

These same factors are applicable to any plaintiff or defendant that comes before the court with opposition to EMC.

Relative to KK's opposition to EMC at her hearing, the Court ruled in favor of the media, and granted permission for EMC.

Court did not agree with counsels argument that there would be interference, or that EMC would detract from the decorum and dignity of the courtroom.

 

[skyedaze]

As to the bolded---I'd be freaked out if someone I had never laid eyes on before, came to my door with my favourite Starbucks, and handed it to me. I'd be like WTH?

Yeah that drink would hit the garbage can right away!

 

[Oregon]

I hope for the B family, that they get the answers they need and justice rules with a heavy hand to all those who were in any way responsible for her death and the cover up.

 

[Steelslady]

Yeah that drink would hit the garbage can right away!

I love your posts. Some of them crack me up, the way you word them. I find myself smiling and nodding my head in agreement when reading them.

 

[gitana1]

Yes, there is plenty of evidence that points to PF as the murderer.
But I think the prosecution is also depending on their star witness and her testimony, especially since they do not have a body.
I can imagine the defense is going to question her aggressively, and challenge her every word.

I'm still wondering what happens if they find that she is lying about something significant, (even though it may be impossible) and enough if the jury does not believe her, what happens next?

Of course I'm hoping the jury will believe her and consider all the evidence carefully, but in the event that they can't reach a decision or KK doesn't meet the terms of the plea deal, then what happens?

Not much. If she testifies to what she told investigators but PF is not convicted they aren't going to renege on their plea deal and charge her with more or ask for a higher sentence. It wouldnt be her fault as long as she testifies to what she earlier stated. Successful conviction is never part of plea deal terms.

If she doesn't meet the terms of her plea deal (because she fails to testify to what she told them) then it is likely she will be sentenced to more than what they agreed to. I don't believe she would be likely to face greater charges but it could be possible.

 

[MsBetsy]

Not much. If she testifies to what she told investigators but PF is not convicted they aren't going to renege on their plea deal and charge her with more or ask for a higher sentence. It wouldnt be her fault as long as she testifies to what she earlier stated. Successful conviction is never part of plea deal terms.

If she doesn't meet the terms of her plea deal (because she fails to testify to what she told them) then it is likely she will be sentenced to more than what they agreed to. I don't believe she would be likely to face greater charges but it could be possible.

Thank you! I think I finally got my answer.

 

[Snowsnake]

The discoloration is more than likely due to the heat generated by a decomposing body. Hay burns or turns brown easily. The tote would leave a definite outline. Remember it was placed at the top of the stack close to a metal roof which would have gathered more heat. The bale being toward the back of the barn would be difficult to get out and feed. I don’t think PF figured on LE finding the bale or KK rolling on him that fast.

Cadaver dogs miss things all the time. His handler can go on the stand to explain this, or just as effectively, the dog itself can.

It’s pointless either way.

Dogs did hit on the hay at Nash Ranch, but I want to know what that discoloration is.

Probably blood.[

 

[Noharg]

I just thought you’d like to see this again!

ETA
Colorado Judicial Branch - Teller - Cases of Interest - The People of the State of Colorado v. Patrick Frazee

 

[10ofRods]

So in just 4 days, we should know if this is going to trial (pre-trial readiness conference). I'm betting it's a go. This judge sounds pretty serious about getting this done. Oh, I hope there's at least audio (but not holding my breath).

 

[MassGuy]

So in just 4 days, we should know if this is going to trial (pre-trial readiness conference). I'm betting it's a go. This judge sounds pretty serious about getting this done. Oh, I hope there's at least audio (but not holding my breath).

Unfortunately, audio recordings are explicitly prohibited in all the decorum orders. So it looks like we struck out there.

With the denial of expanded media coverage, we’ll have to follow on Twitter.

 

[GordianKnot]

Unfortunately, audio recordings are explicitly prohibited in all the decorum orders. So it looks like we struck out there.

With the denial of expanded media coverage, we’ll have to follow on Twitter.

When judges deny expanded media requests, they should be required to publish free online transcripts of the court testimony.

Daily.

JMO.

 

[MassGuy]

When judges deny expanded media requests, they should be required to publish free online transcripts of the court testimony.

Daily.

JMO.

Not only that, but the judge should be forced to write these verbatim transcripts by hand, and then type them up immediately after court adjourns for the day.

 

[GordianKnot]

Not only that, but the judge should be forced to write these verbatim transcripts by hand, and then type them up immediately after court adjourns for the day.

Most certainly.

The judge should also be required to wash out his/her own coffee cup in the break room each day before leaving.

Those things don't just clean themselves.

Also, the waste baskets need to be emptied.

There's a lot more to this job than a robe and a gavel.

So grab yourself a toilet brush and make yourself useful, Your Honor.

 

[Seattle1]

When judges deny expanded media requests, they should be required to publish free online transcripts of the court testimony.

Daily.

JMO.

Got it -- I'll see if I can put a bug in Sam's ear to deliver your request.

 

[MassGuy]

Got it -- I'll see if I can put a bug in Sam's ear to deliver your request.

Sam needs to find a way to sit in the front row, at the very least.

Preferably he can have a seat installed right next to the judge, as those acoustics have already proven problematic.

 

[Seattle1]

 

[pcrum12]

awfully quiet here

 

[MassGuy]

awfully quiet here

It won’t be that way come Friday, I promise you that.